Further Reading

As detailed by the International Business Times yesterday, public records show that Comcast's political arm and employees have been supporting Emanuel for a decade. Emanuel was a member of Congress from 2003 to 2009 and then served as President Obama's chief of staff for nearly two years. He has been Chicago mayor since May 2011.

"[D]uring his time running for and serving as mayor of Chicago, Emanuel has received large campaign contributions from Comcast and its employees, including from [Comcast Executive Vice President David] Cohen himself, who contributed $5,000 to Emanuel’s mayoral campaign in February 2011," the International Business Times wrote. "Cohen also contributed $10,000 to the Chicago Committee, which the Chicago Tribune has described as Emanuel’s 'other political fund (which) he uses for political activities that support his policy initiatives at City Hall.' In all, records from the Illinois State Board of Elections show that Emanuel’s mayoral campaign and his other municipal political organizations have received $50,000 from Comcast employees since he began running for mayor in 2010."

Besides that, Comcast's political action committee gave $46,000 to Emanuel's congressional campaigns between 2003 and 2008.

Cohen wrote last week that Comcast is proud to have Emanuel's support, saying it "underscores the powerful benefits of this transaction for their cities, constituents, and customers—and the impact that the enhanced scale, investment, and innovation of Comcast will have on their local communities."

Emanuel wrote a letter to the FCC on August 22 saying he was "provid[ing] the City of Chicago's perspective on the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable."

"From our perspective, we do not believe the proposed transaction would reduce choice, elevate prices, or otherwise harm consumers," Emanuel wrote. "Further, we are optimistic that the increased resources of the combined corporation will lead to more investment in local network infrastructure and faster Internet speeds. This is critically important to Chicago, as it would help achieve our goal of reducing the digital divide, allowing all Chicagoans to obtain effective access to the information necessary to thrive in today's high-tech world."

Emanuel didn't mention the money he receives from Comcast but pointed to the company's support of public schools and its Internet Essentials program for low-income families, which was created in order to secure approval for Comcast's 2011 purchase of NBCUniversal. Consumer advocacy groups have criticized Internet Essentials for being too difficult to sign up for and have asked regulators to require Comcast to expand and improve the program. Emanuel did not ask the FCC to impose any such requirements.

As we've written before, Comcast has donated to many of the politicians and groups supporting the acquisition of Time Warner Cable, and its political action committee has donated prolifically to members of Congress who are reviewing the merger.

“We are proudly committed to our local communities and work closely with them," Comcast told Ars today. "We are honored to have the support of Mayor Emanuel as well as numerous community and education groups across the country—many of them as their letters state work directly with us to implement Internet Essentials—the success of which would not be possible without the partnership and support from local leaders, educators, and community and non-profit partners. We have a long history of working with local officials and community groups to improve the areas where our customers and our employees live and work.”

Promoted Comments

There have been so many articles on Ars and elsewhere about the massive amount of political donations attempting to grease the Comcast merger, block municipal broadband, and other communications and FCC-related topics. It would be really interesting if there were some way to quantify the effect this has on the regulatory agencies, and on public (voter) opinion.

If we're all sitting back and saying "oh, this again. No surprise here," then paying for political access will be even more normal and accepted than it is now. On the other hand, if we're writing to the FCC and other agencies and elected officials, and tanking the bribery into account when voting, change can happen. If people start writing to the editorial pages of the Chicago papers saying "I'm voting against Rahm because he's for sale to the highest bidder," that sends an unmistakable message that IMO needs to be heard by those accepting the pay for play donations.